Hi All,
there's been a very interesting development in the 'What should we be teaching in Museum and Gallery Studies' debate....(i.e. the relevance of all that critical theory you are introduced to in our BA and MA programmes).....well it seems that Nietzche's (& Foucault's, & Lyotard's, & Barthes' and etc etc) 'critical history' does have a role to play in the museum...as the (very timely) 'Opinion' (published in Museum Practice (no less!), Spring 2009 has clearly demonstrated.....(I have a scanned copy of it, just email me and I'll 'post' it onto you).
Daniele Wagner, of the Musee d'Histoire de la Ville Luxembourg, writer of the short piece, suggests that 'historical subjects are often reduced to cliches in museums, contradicting the complexity of the past'. And she draws on Lyotard to suggest that museums should 'seek ways to stimulate critical debate about the past'.
This is really refreshing, don't you think?...At last, museum practice is seeing the relevance of a critical philosophy of history, and for you as potential museum professionals, doing all that hard thinking will not be wasted!
Of course, it is a difficult task to make such a project happen in the museum as we know, given the customary constraints. But given the significance of a 'critical history' in our understanding of the past, especially in times such as ours where there seems to be, to quote Nietzche, an 'excess of history', and given that the museum is the 'public face' of history, it seems to me that the museum is precisely the location for such criticality....
Mark
Welcome to the Leeds University Museum Studies Blog. Here you can follow the activities, conversations and debates associated with the University's School of Fine Art, History of Art and Cultural Studies courses. We envisage it as an informal space for museum-related discussion, interests & the sharing of ideas. To join the conversation click the 'Get involved!' tab. We hope you enjoy it! Rosa and Mark
The first half of the piece does appear to offer a refreshing level of critical self-reflection, although the 'practice' element detailed in the second half seems more questionable. It worries me a little that the 'broader public' should be encouraged by the museum to engage with the historical object on an 'emotional' plane. Would this really 'stimulate critical debate about the past'? Is it not closer to the kind of classic postmodern, post-structuralist reaction to functionalist macro history by fragmenting it to the level of individual subjective experience?
ReplyDeleteI think the distance between 'Museum Practice' and museum practice is also interesting to explore in this instance.
"..shedding light.."
ReplyDelete"..reveal the objects strong emotional meanings."
MPs' expenses claims? Paper based, yet still relevant, but challenging.
I think you're right Rebecca, individual experience does seem to be privileged in the suggestion of an 'emotional' response....but then that raises the old polarising dichotomy of 'rational' thinking over 'emotional' engagement......Kant vs Proust?......now that's a fight I'd pay to see!
ReplyDeletemark